My old adversary and occasional ally (and vice-versa) Hugh Hewitt raises an issue about Old Media and New that's been on a lot of people's minds lately:
Dean Lemann at Columbia Journalism School ought to put a few of his bright lights to work reverse engineering Politico, RCP and Ambinder/Cillizza to determine what it is about these sites/writers that has engendered credibility among almost all partisans, left and right. The easy answer is that they are fair to all comers and many of the other sites/blogs that tried to grab some traffic in the space have failed on this account, but there is also more in terms of style and content, because none of them are dull or old school when it comes to Journalism 101's deadening "he said, she said." I suspect it is the management of load --that the coverage is very carefully balanced between "positive R" and "positive D," "negative R" and "negative D" over a significant period of time, combined with personality.
In other words, where can New Media savvy readers get the best thinking from both sides with a spot of wit?
Hugh, it's here. It really is here.
Thoughts